Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-vdhp9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-12T11:21:47.948Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A brief comment on Hawthorne (2023): “On the definition of distinct mineral species: A critique of current IMA-CNMNC procedures”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2023

Ferdinando Bosi Open the ORCID record for Ferdinando Bosi [Opens in a new window] ,
Frédéric Hatert Open the ORCID record for Frédéric Hatert [Opens in a new window] ,
Marco Pasero ,
Stuart J. Mills ,
Ritsuro Miyawaki  and
Ulf Hålenius
Ferdinando Bosi*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Sapienza University of Roma, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, I-00185 Rome, Italy
Frédéric Hatert
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Mineralogy, University of Liège, Bâtiment B-18, B-4000 Liège, Belgium
Marco Pasero
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Pisa, Via S. Maria 53, I-56126 Pisa, Italy
Stuart J. Mills
Affiliation:
Geosciences, Museums Victoria, P.O. Box 666, Melbourne, Victoria 3001, Australia
Ritsuro Miyawaki
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Paleontology, The National Museum of Nature and Science, 4-1-1, Amakubo, Tsukuba 305-0005, Japan
Ulf Hålenius
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, Swedish Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 50 007, SE-104 05 Stockholm, Sweden
*
Corresponding author: Ferdinando Bosi; Email: ferdinando.bosi@uniroma1.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this communication we present a brief response to Hawthorne (2023) who, in a paper in volume 87, doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2023.8 (this journal), claims evidence for violations of the electroneutrality principle in mineral formulae derived through IMA–CNMNC procedures: i.e. the dominant-constituent rule, the valency-imposed double site-occupancy, the dominant-valency rule, and the site-total-charge approach (STC).

His statement is not correct as the STC method is based on the end-member definition; thus, it cannot violate the requirements of an end-member, particularly the laws of conservation of electric charge. The STC was developed to address the shortcomings in the previous IMA–CNMNC procedures.

The real question is: which method to use to define an end-member formula? Currently, there are two approaches: (1) STC, which first identifies the dominant end-member charge arrangement and then leads to the dominant end-member composition; (2) the dominant end-member approach.

Keywords

IMA-CNMNCmineral formulaend-membersite total charge

Information

Type
Comment
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 87 , Issue 3 , June 2023 , pp. 505 - 507
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of the United Kingdom and Ireland

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Sergey V Krivovichev

References

Bhattacharjee, S., Dey, M., Chakarabarty, A., Mitchell, R.H. and Ren, M. (2022) Zero-valent-dominant pyrochlores: Endmember formula calculation and petrogenetic significance. The Canadian Mineralogist, 60, 469–484.Google Scholar
Bosi, F. (2018) On the mineral nomenclatures: the dominant-valency rule. Abstract to XXII meeting of the IMA, Melbourne, Australia, p. 354.Google Scholar
Bosi, F., Hatert, F., Hålenius, U., Pasero, M., Miyawaki, R. and Mills, S.J. (2019a) On the application of the IMA-CNMNC dominant-valency rule to complex mineral compositions. Mineralogical Magazine, 83, 627–632.Google Scholar
Bosi, F., Biagioni, C. and Oberti, R. (2019b) On the chemical identification and classification of minerals. Minerals, 9, 591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, I.D. (2016) The Chemical Bond in Inorganic Chemistry: The Bond Valence Model. International Union of Crystallography Monographs on Crystallography, vol. 12, Oxford University Press, UK, 352 pp.Google Scholar
Gagné, O.C. and Hawthorne, F.C. (2016) Chemographic exploration of the milarite-type structure, The Canadian Mineralogist, 54, 1229–1247.Google Scholar
Hatert, F. and Burke, E.A.J. (2008) The IMA–CNMNC dominant-constituent rule revisited and extended. The Canadian Mineralogist, 46, 717–728.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, F.C. (2023) On the definition of distinct mineral species: A critique of current IMA-CNMNC procedures. Mineralogical Magazine, 87, 494–504, doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2023.8.Google Scholar
Nickel, E.H. and Grice, J.D. (1998) The IMA commission on new minerals and mineral names: procedures and guidelines on mineral nomenclature. The Canadian Mineralogist, 36, 913–926.Google Scholar